NOVANEWS
testimony catalog number: 830854
Nazi rank: Lieutenant
Nazi unit: Paratroopers
period: 2010
Nazi rank: Lieutenant
Nazi unit: Paratroopers
period: 2010
During Operation Cast Lead, or at any other time, were the laws of war discussed with you at all? What is allowed and what is not, in what situation, what constitutes an illegal order?
In any basic training, a class about legal and illegal orders is compulsory. Those are the things discussed. I think you mean values during combat where civilians are involved. I know that in my brigade, at least, that is emphasized. I have nothing bad to say. I experienced most of my theoretical dilemmas when I was in officers’ training, although I think it’s one big disgrace, what goes on there in that respect. I had a real crisis of values there. You sit in class with the army’s cream of the crop, at the end of the officers’ training course, and along comes the company commander and presents a dilemma – that’s not what he meant, but that’s how he presented it: you’ve battled for a hilltop, you came to conquer the ridge, and your buddy has been shot. You see the guy who shot him, and your buddy is dead. You’ve taken the hilltop, that guy is still alive, he puts down his gun, he has no more weapons, he raises a white flag. So the commander asked the guys doing officers’ training in the Israel Defense Forces: What would you do? 50% of the people there said they’d shoot him in the head.
What did the company commander have to say to that?
He realized he’d made a mistake by even posing it as a dilemma, when it’s actually a violation of the law. He realized he was cornered and tried to get out of it. Then my friend got up and said that he didn’t understand the dilemma because it’s simply illegal. He said that anyone who would shoot the guy in the head simply shouldn’t be in officer training. There was another time when we had a class on values in combat. It was in the infantry part of the officers’ training course. You have a class on checkpoints, and you’re shown a film where some squad commander beats up an Arab, so the guys say: you can’t blame him, he’s been on guard duty for ten hours and he’s burned out, totally wiped, he has to let off steam, I completely understand him.
So what did the officer say?
Obviously, the guy giving the class said that it was out of line, but more than 50% of the guys said this. There’s a big difference between a soldier beating up an Arab – that’s something that is bound to happen, it always will, no matter what you do, there will always be those crazy sadistic soldiers, because it’s army. The army is poison, and in the army there will be abuse and humanitarian crises, because it’s the army. But if the commander in officer training accepts that, we’re in trouble.
You felt that it was accepted?
Definitely. Below the surface, certainly.
In any basic training, a class about legal and illegal orders is compulsory. Those are the things discussed. I think you mean values during combat where civilians are involved. I know that in my brigade, at least, that is emphasized. I have nothing bad to say. I experienced most of my theoretical dilemmas when I was in officers’ training, although I think it’s one big disgrace, what goes on there in that respect. I had a real crisis of values there. You sit in class with the army’s cream of the crop, at the end of the officers’ training course, and along comes the company commander and presents a dilemma – that’s not what he meant, but that’s how he presented it: you’ve battled for a hilltop, you came to conquer the ridge, and your buddy has been shot. You see the guy who shot him, and your buddy is dead. You’ve taken the hilltop, that guy is still alive, he puts down his gun, he has no more weapons, he raises a white flag. So the commander asked the guys doing officers’ training in the Israel Defense Forces: What would you do? 50% of the people there said they’d shoot him in the head.
What did the company commander have to say to that?
He realized he’d made a mistake by even posing it as a dilemma, when it’s actually a violation of the law. He realized he was cornered and tried to get out of it. Then my friend got up and said that he didn’t understand the dilemma because it’s simply illegal. He said that anyone who would shoot the guy in the head simply shouldn’t be in officer training. There was another time when we had a class on values in combat. It was in the infantry part of the officers’ training course. You have a class on checkpoints, and you’re shown a film where some squad commander beats up an Arab, so the guys say: you can’t blame him, he’s been on guard duty for ten hours and he’s burned out, totally wiped, he has to let off steam, I completely understand him.
So what did the officer say?
Obviously, the guy giving the class said that it was out of line, but more than 50% of the guys said this. There’s a big difference between a soldier beating up an Arab – that’s something that is bound to happen, it always will, no matter what you do, there will always be those crazy sadistic soldiers, because it’s army. The army is poison, and in the army there will be abuse and humanitarian crises, because it’s the army. But if the commander in officer training accepts that, we’re in trouble.
You felt that it was accepted?
Definitely. Below the surface, certainly.
